POST MATCH DISCUSSION - Round 13

[whatwhat say what 22,237]

1 minute ago, Sir Why You Little said:

After 3 years we still haven't come very far

that's just silly.

 

we're miles away from where we were three years ago.

 

three years ago they belted us by around 100 in the wet.

[hemingway 7,615]

Understandable loss but still very disappointed. 

[Ethan Tremblay 30,133]

Sometimes all you can do is laugh.

[DemonOX 8,712]

Those who say we have enough midfielders need to think again IMO.

u can never have to many midfielders especially us. 

[45HG 1,539]

Shame about the last quarter.

But anyone surprised about a young side running out of legs after a 6 day break playing the best contested team in the league in the wet at home and gunning for top spot needs to step away from the keyboard.

We're not there yet.

 

 

[doc roet 1,281]

150 odd tackles,what does that tell you?

We have got the ball, but fcku around with silly handballs to another

team mate under pressure who then gets tackled and on it goes.

Vince is the only one who tries to clear the ball forward.

 

[Nascent 8,657]

Someone clearly forgot to tell them it was raining, trying to spot up 15 metre passes at the flanks to a 50/50 is just stupid. But what was more infuriating was it seemed they gave up in the last quarter. How Sydney doubled our tackle count is just baffling in these conditions. Not enough want.

They have the week off now to think about it. Shame it fell away so badly. While not happy, I was content with the effort for the first 3/4. 

[Generation dee 1,336]

3 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

After 3 years we still haven't come very far

that was horrible

Did you watch it ?

[Buzzy 992]

3 minutes ago, Return to Glory said:

Agreed. On that, Oliver needs a rest. As does Stretch. Bring in ANB and Brayshaw and Hulett for Vandenburg.

the bye = a rest

[stuie 7,374]

1 minute ago, Emerald said:

Thinking Dawes could take a mark today meant we were outcoached before the first bounce.

Seriously? You're going to put it on Dawes? Did you even see the game? If Hogan gave half the effort Dawes does he'd be a genuine superstar, not just a frontrunner.

 

[Samael 560]

2 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Ten goal loss in the wet

Double our scoring shots for almost the same inside 50's

Almost no score between the 10 minute mark of third quarter and the 27 minute mark of the last

Hard to see many positives

Totally agree. In those conditions it should have been close all day. I did not realise Billy Stretch was playing today. 

 

[dee-tox 4,835]

Smashed in the midfield.

Game plan was wrong to try and hit up target around the flanks. Should have planted Dawes in the square and bombed to him. 

Too many blokes didn't do enough. Stretch, Jetta, Kennedy, Tyson, etc. 

[sydneydee 684]

Thought we played with reasonable intensity for the first three quarters. Lots of good moments from our young brigade. 

Still can't believe that we went into the match unchanged given the conditions and 6 day turnaround. 

Swans were simply faster, harder and cleaner than us all day. We really need to learn how to play smarter wet weather football. 

[Jaded No More 67,875]

Just now, Nasher said:

Unlike most in the match day thread, I didn't hate the first three quarters. In a game where strength matters, I felt we were just hanging on in the contest, which is a decent effort given the age and experience gap.

Obviously the last quarter was limp and disappointing.

Easy to blame selecting talls, but there were plenty of littles who gave us nothing, and I think it's no coincidence that it was young, under strength players like Stretch who were the least effective in the conditions. Pretty hard to swallow the idea that Grimes or Michie would have made that much difference.

While selection and coaching isn't solely to blame, today was another example of both of these elements being very poor.

We again went in unchanged instead of bringing in a couple of fresh legs. Sydney made a lot of changes, and actually some of their fresher legs had good games.
From the get go they had McVeigh playing the sweeping role, and they put Kennedy on him which is a terrible match up! Why didn't they put Bugg up there to play a defensive forward role? 

Our setup in the centre bounces was atrocious, and did not make any use of having a serious advantage in the ruck with Gawn taking on a spud like Sinclair. 

Defensively again we tried that idiotic diamond defence, the worst possible day to stick with this structure as monsoonal rain calls for quick kicks up forward, putting our zoning defenders in bad positions. It wasn't under the third quarter that we smartened up, by which point it was too late. 

Our midfield had a stinker, we needed to tackle hard, and we didn't. We let too many Sydney players run free forward of the ball, and couldn't even win crucial centre clearances.

I thought Dawes played good wet weather footy, but Hogan was atrocious. His second efforts were non existent.

Only Vince, Petracca and Watts know how to play wet weather footy. The rest made mind boggling decisions with the ball, especially coming off half back. We tend to make dumb decisions even in the dry conditions, but in the wet those decisions were magnified and were super costly.

Overall it's not disappointing to lose to Sydney, but it is disappointing to see us not learning from our Hawthorn game experience, and once again making easily rectifiable decisions at the selection table!

[Bobby McKenzie 2,331]

3 minutes ago, Nasher said:

Bang on as usual WYL. We're just as bad as we were in the 2 win 2014 season.

Yep, he seems to be an eternal pessimist. You can't judge the team today in atrocious conditions. We are moving forward very nicely.

[TeamPlayedFine39 8,380]

The blow-out in the last quarter was very disappointing, but this was Sydney... at the SCG... in the rain... Sydney will play off for the premiership this year, so a defeat, while unpleasant, is not a disaster.

A young team looked tired today and hopefully the bye will refresh and reenergise.  There's been plenty to like in the first half of the year; I hope we can focus on that for the next two weeks rather than bemoaning this poor performance against a very, very good team.

[Moonshadow 17,558]

Luke Parker 17 tackles. The guy's a freak.

[Akum 2,660]

I just have one request:

If we lose one game by doing something stupid, can we please not repeat it? Ever?

We NEVER AGAIN field an unchanged side on a 6-day break against a top team.

We NEVER AGAIN go in too tall for the conditions.

We NEVER AGAIN let a loose man in defence run free all day.

These things have all hamstrung us in the recent past.

The really frustrating thing this season is that, although we have a much better team, off-field stupidity has too often been a factor in not allowing us to give a good account of ourselves.

Edited June 19, 2016 by Akum
too many question marks

[picket fence 16,707]

Both Mc Donalds were dreadful today! Ronald would have been better and certainly more colorful!

[Vineytime 836]

We learnt nothing from the Hawks game a few weeks back, still over using the handball in wet conditions. 

Forwards were poor again, need to play in front and create a contest in the air!

[Jerry Lundergard 420]

15 minutes ago, Wadda We Sing said:

Sydney 155 tackles, most in a game ever, thats more than 1 per minute.

17 to parker....someone needs to check and see if the statisicians up there have him in their Draftstars and Moneyball teams.

Edited June 19, 2016 by Jerry Lundergard

[Watts the matter 1,235]

2 minutes ago, Bobby McKenzie said:

Yep, he seems to be an eternal pessimist. You can't judge the team today in atrocious conditions. We are moving forward very nicely.

Why not? Footy is played in all conditions.

[Bells 155]

I am a glass half full person.

At 3/4 time it was within our reach - they had to put in a record breaking tackling effort to take it away from us when we were close. Considering their experience, on their homeground, we did ok.  Until the last quarter - that is where our youth and inexperience kicked in.  They are now 2nd on the table - is it really that surprising that the took the game away?

[jnrmac 19,908]

13 minutes ago, Nasher said:

Unlike most in the match day thread, I didn't hate the first three quarters. In a game where strength matters, I felt we were just hanging on in the contest, which is a decent effort given the age and experience gap.

Obviously the last quarter was limp and disappointing.

Easy to blame selecting talls, but there were plenty of littles who gave us nothing, and I think it's no coincidence that it was young, under strength players like Stretch who were the least effective in the conditions. Pretty hard to swallow the idea that Grimes or Michie would have made that much difference.

Can't agree with the Grimes comment. He would have added a lot more than some out there, like Kent for example. Jetta was woeful but they were never going to replace Jetta for Grimes. Nonetheless his body size, experience, smarts and desperation would have added a lot.

[Akum 2,660]

10 minutes ago, 45HG said:

Shame about the last quarter.

But anyone surprised about a young side running out of legs after a 6 day break playing the best contested team in the league in the wet at home and gunning for top spot needs to step away from the keyboard.

We're not there yet.

 

 

Fine. But not repeating pst mistakes would be a great place to start.